Skip to main content

Table 2 Changes in HbA1c

From: The impact of interventions on appointment and clinical outcomes for individuals with diabetes: a systematic review

 

Author

On schedule

To visit

With information

HbA1c at baseline

Change in HbA1c

P-value

Comparisons tested

Intervention group

Control group

Intervention group

Control group

39

Kirsh et al. 2007 [12]

  

10.4

9.8

−1.44

0.30

.002

Group × Time interaction @18 mo.

70

Subramanian et al. 2009 [23]

  

7.7

7.5

−0.19

−0.03

≤0.05

Group × Time interaction @1 year

3

Avdal et al. 2011 [61]

  

8.0

8.1

−0.5

NA

≤.010

Time effect @6 mo.

NA

0.05

NS

Time effect @6 mo.

5

Benhamou et al. 2007 [63]

  

8.3

8.2

−0.14

0.12

.097

Group effect @6 mo.

7

Bond et al. 2007 [36]

  

7.0

7.1

−0.6

−0.1

0.01

Group effect @6 mo.

8

Carter et al. 2011 [37]

  

9.0

8.8

−2.18

−0.9

≤.050

Group effect @9 mo.

9

Cavan et al. 2003 [65]

  

9.7

NA

−1.7a

NA

≤.005

Patients with a disease duration ≤ 10 years

Time effect @2 year

9.5

NA

−0.3a

NA

NS

Patients with a disease duration > 10 years

Time effect @2 year

12

Cho et al. 2009 [66] (phone)

  

8.3

NA

−1.1

NA

≤.010

Time effect @3 mo.

Cho et al. 2009 [66] (internet)

  

7.6

NA

−0.6

NA

<.010

Time effect @3 mo.

13

Cho et al. 2011 [67]

  

8.0

8.0

−0.5

−0.2

<0.01

Time effect @3 mo.

18

Dijkstra et al. 2005 [54]

  

8.1

8.0

−0.3

0.2

≤.001

Group effect @1 year

21

Farmer et al. 2005 [68]

  

9.2

9.3

−0.6a

−0.4a

0.33

Group effect @9 mo.

24

Glasgow et al. 2003 [70] (peer support)

  

7.54

7.35

−0.12

0.33

≤.05

Group × Time interaction @10 mo.

Glasgow et al. 2003 [70] (tailored self-management)

  

7.45

7.43

−0.03

0.24

NS

Group × Time interaction @10 mo.

26

Grant et al. 2008 [55]

  

7.3

7.4

−0.16

−0.26

0.62

Group effect @1 year

27

Harno et al. 2006 [71]

  

7.82

8.21

−0.50

NA

S

p ≤ .05 Group effect @1 year

NA

−0.38

S

33

HS Kim et al. 2006 [42] “Impact of a nurse short message service intervention…”

  

8.1

NA

−1.10

NA

.006

Time effect @3 mo.

34

HS Kim 2007 [39] “A randomized controlled trial of a nurse short-message…”

  

8.09

7.59

−1.15

0.07

.005

Group × Time interaction @3 mo.

35

HS Kim 2007 [40] “Impact of web-based nurse’s education…”

  

6.92

6.71

−0.21

NA

0.20

Patients with a baseline HbA1c < 7 %

Time effect @3 mo.

NA

0.43

.034

Patients with a baseline HbA1c < 7 %

Time effect @3 mo.

9.35

8.24

−2.15

NA

≤.007

Patients with a baseline HbA1c ≥ 7 %

Time effect @3 mo.

NA

0.22

NS

Patients with a baseline HbA1c ≥ 7 %

Time effect @3 mo.

36

HS Kim and Jeong 2007 [41] “A nurse short message service by cellular phone…”

  

8.09

7.59

−1.05a

0.11a

.008

Group × Time interaction @6 mo.

37

HS Kim and Song 2008 [43] “Technological intervention for obese patients with type 2 diabetes”

  

8.16

7.66

−1.09a

0a

.043

Group × Time interaction @6 mo.

−1.09a

NA

≤.050

Time effect @6 mo.

NA

0a

NS

Time effect @6 mo.

38

SI Kim and HS Kim 2008 [73] “Effectiveness of mobile and internet intervention…”

  

8.16

7.66

−1.49a

0.53a

.017

Group × Time interaction @12 mo.

−1.49a

NA

≤.050

Time effect @12 mo.

NA

0.53a

NS

Time effect @12mo.

39

Kwon et al. 2004 [74]

  

7.5

NA

−0.5

NA

≤.003

Time effect @3 mo.

40

Kwon et al. 2004 [45]

  

7.59

7.19

−0.54

0.33

<0.05

Group effect @3 mo.

−0.54

NA

≤.050

Time effect @3 mo.

NA

0.33

NS

Time effect @3 mo.

44

Lorig et al. 2010 [76] (treatment, no reinforcement)

  

6.5

6.40

−0.03

0.13

0.04

Group effect @6 mo.

Lorig et al. 2010 [76] (treatment and reinforcement)

  

6.43

0.02

0.13

0.16

Group effect @6 mo.

Lorig et al. 2010 [76] (treatment combined)

  

6.47

−0.01

0.13

0.04

Group effect @6 mo.

46

McCarrier et al. 2006 [77]

  

7.99

8.05

−0.37

0.11

0.16

Group effect @12 mo.

49

McMahon et al. 2005 [78]

  

10.0

9.9

−1.6

−1.2

≤.050

Group × Time interaction @12 mo.

50

McMahon et al. 2012 [47] (online care)

  

9.6

NA

−1.3

NA

<.0001

Time effect @1 year

NS

Group effect between online care and usual care with web-training @1 year

McMahon et al. 2012 [47] (telephone care)

  

9.9

NA

−1.5

NA

<.0001

Time effect @1 year

NS

Group effect between telephone care and usual care with web-training @1 year

McMahon et al. 2012 [47] (usual care with web-training)

  

10.1

NA

−1.7

NA

<.0001

Time effect @1 year

52

Meigs et al. 2003 [49]

  

8.4

8.1

−0.23

0.14

0.09

Group × Time interaction @12 mo.

55

Moattari et al. 2013 [80]

  

9.1

9.4

−2.0

−0.6

<.001

Between group @3 mo.

56

Moorman et al. 2012 [81]

  

8.9

8.9

NA

NA

NS

Between prospective (intervention) vs. retrospective (control) group

57

Musacchio et al. 2011 [82]

  

6.6

NA

0.2

NA

NP

Patients with a baseline HbA1c < 7.5 % @12 mo.

7.7

NA

−0.4

NA

NP

Patients with a baseline HbA1c between 7.5 % and 8 % @12 mo.

8.3

NA

−0.9

NA

NP

Patients with a baseline HbA1c between 8 % and 9 % @12 mo.

10.0

NA

−2.2

NA

NP

Patients with a baseline HbA1c > 9 % @12 mo.

58

Nes et al. 2012 [83]

  

7.4

NA

−0.4

NA

NP

@3 mo.

61

Ralston et al. 2009 [38]

  

8.2

7.9

−0.9

0.2

0.01

Group × Time interaction @12 mo.

62

Ryan et al. 2013 [85]

  

7.5

NA

−0.6

NA

0.04

Time effect @ 13 mo.

63

Sacco et al. 2009 [48]

  

8.4

8.5

−1.0

−0.7

NS

Group effect @6 mo.

67

KE Smith et al. 2004 [86]

  

10.95

NA

−2.22

NA

0.001

Time effect @6 mo.

68

Song et al. 2009 [87]

  

7.6

7.7

−0.8a

−0.4a

0.26

Group × Time interaction @3 mo.

69

Stone et al. 2012 [88] (Active care management to care coordination with home telemonitoring)

  

7.77

NA

0.26

NA

NS

Time effect @ 6 mo.

Stone et al. 2012 [88] (Active care management to care coordination)

  

7.97

NA

0.19

NA

NS

Time effect @ 6 mo.

Stone et al. 2012 [88] (Care coordination to care coordination)

  

8.56

NA

0.15

NA

NS

Time effect @ 6 mo.

Stone et al. 2012 [88] (Care coordination to usual care)

  

8.53

NA

0.31

NA

NS

Time effect @ 6 mo.

71

Tang et al. 2013 [89]

  

9.2

9.3

−1.1

−1.0

0.13

Between group @1 year

73

Tildesley et al. 2010 [90]

  

8.8

8.5

−1.2a

−0.1a

≤.050

Group effect @6 mo.

−1.2a

NA

≤.001

Time effect @6 mo.

NA

−0.1a

0.51

Time effect @6 mo.

76

Yoo et al. 2009 [91]

  

7.6

7.4

−0.5

0.2

≤.001

Group × Time interaction @3 mo.

77

Yoon and HS Kim 2008 [92]

  

8.09

7.59

−1.32a

0.81a

≤.001

Group × Time interaction @12 mo.

65

Seto et al. 2012 [16]

 

7.3

NA

−0.3

NA

<.001

Time effect @ 8 mo.

4

Bailie et al. 2004 [62]

 

9.0

NA

−0.2a

NA

0.23

Time effect @3 years

11

Cho et al. 2006 [57]

 

7.7

7.5

−1.0a

−0.1a

≤.050

Group effect @30 mo.

16

de Grauw et al. 2002 [19]

 

8.2

NA

−1.1

NA

≤.001

Unpaired t-test @6 year

30

Jones and Curry 2006 [50]

 

7.25

7.13

0.06

−0.18

0.24

Group effect within 16 months

45

MacLean et al. 2009 [20]

 

7.11

7.03

0.05

−0.02

0.08

Group × Time interaction @32 months

64

Sadur et al. 1999 [22]

 

9.7

9.6

−1.3

−0.22

≤.0001

Group effect @6 mo. or beyond

28

Holbrook et al. 2009 [28]

 

7.0

7.1

−0.2

0.2

0.03

Group effect @6 mo.

29

Hurwitz et al. 1993 [72]

 

10.4

10.3

−0.4

0.3

NP

Group effect @2 year

48

McDiarmid et al. 2001 [51]

 

8.0

NA

−0.1

NA

NP

Time effect @1 year

53

Meulepas et al. 2007 [30]

 

7.2

7.4

0

0.6

≤ .050

Group effect @2 year after intervention (baseline 1 year before intervention)

54

Meulepas et al. 2008 [31]

 

7.3

7.2

−0.2

0.1

<0.05

Group × Time interaction @3 years

72

Thomas et al. 2007 [26]

 

7.3

7.4

−0.02

−0.01

0.83

Group × Time interaction @ 1 year

75

Yeh et al. 2006 [33]

 

9.03

8.95

−1.65

−0.92

0.01

Group effect @8 mo.

42

Lin et al. 2007 [29]

7.8

7.7

−0.6

NA

≤.050

Time effect @3 year

NA

−0.3

0.24

Time effect @3 year

  1. NS Non-significant (p-value>0.05), S Significant (p-value≤0.05), NA Not applicable, NP Not provided
  2. Results are differences in mean before and after implementation of intervention except those indicated with the following superscripts
  3. aMultiple measurements are presented over time after the intervention in the paper, but the last measurement is used to calculate the difference in this table